The sh*tty Rolling Stone Reviews Thread
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: General Music Discussions
Forum Description: Discuss and create polls about all types of music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11389
Printed Date: November 29 2024 at 09:39 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The sh*tty Rolling Stone Reviews Thread
Posted By: boo boo
Subject: The sh*tty Rolling Stone Reviews Thread
Date Posted: September 11 2005 at 14:02
http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/album/_/id/89937/themoodyblues?pageid=rs.ArtistDiscographyMainReleases&pageregion=mainRegion - http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/album/_/id/89937/themood yblues?pageid=rs.ArtistDiscographyMainReleases&pageregio n=mainRegion
^Proof that Rolling Stone is a biased piece of crap magazine, their stupid bias against prog is beyond ridiculous, post your own sh*tty reviews of great prog albums from the masters of sh*tty reviews of great prog albums.
|
Replies:
Posted By: NetsNJFan
Date Posted: September 11 2005 at 14:09
dont take them seriously, I dont
-------------
|
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: September 11 2005 at 14:30
I actually agree with some of this review ("There are some quite fine rock tracks on Days of Future
Passed
("Tuesday Afternoon" especially),) and they are right about the hideous
spoken intro and the orchestral "slush". I normally fast forward
through these bit to get to the songs.
Having said that, most of the music press are predictably anti-prog and I just ignore it now.
|
Posted By: Odysseus
Date Posted: September 11 2005 at 14:39
RollingStone.com wrote:
"Hopefully next time around the Moody Blues will leave their London Festival Orchestra and Yantra at home and get together a straight-ahead, no bullsh*t album of rock..." |
They hate all things prog at Rolling Stone Magazine. By "straight-ahead, no bullsh*t album of rock" they mean "pop-rock with catchy + repetitive lyrics & riffs".
|
Posted By: boo boo
Date Posted: September 11 2005 at 14:46
chopper wrote:
I actually agree with some of this review ("There are some quite fine rock tracks on Days of Future Passed ("Tuesday Afternoon" especially),) and they are right about the hideous spoken intro and the orchestral "slush". I normally fast forward through these bit to get to the songs. Having said that, most of the music press are predictably anti-prog and I just ignore it now.
|
To each his own, but i beg to differ, DOFP is one of the most important and innovative albums ever made, and rolling stone just pisses on it, i guess they dont like to listen to bands that challenges their "its gotta be rock n roll" motto, for the moody blues best album to get a luckwarm review while gwen stefani, britney spears, black eyed peas and NSYNC have gotten 3 and 4 star reviews is a insult...An even worse offense is that they left out DOFP from the 500 greatest albums list, but they just had to add every eminem album, a crapload of madonna albums and no doubts rock steady...oh and yes and king crimson were not good enough for the top 500, but they just had to add hole and the cars...Maybe im being silly for letting one crummy magazines opinion get to me so much, but the fact that kids are being spoonfed on this kind of sh*t and are led to believe that the kind of bands that rolling stone are promoting is the best music out there is quite disturbing.
|
Posted By: MoodsWings
Date Posted: September 11 2005 at 14:56
Rolling Stone magazine hasn't been relevant to music in a long time as far as I'm concerned.
|
Posted By: Odysseus
Date Posted: September 11 2005 at 16:27
MoodsWings wrote:
Rolling Stone magazine hasn't been relevant to music in a long time as far as I'm concerned. |
Oh, so true.
|
Posted By: porter
Date Posted: September 11 2005 at 16:29
boo boo wrote:
chopper wrote:
I actually agree with some of this review ("There are some quite fine rock tracks on Days of Future Passed ("Tuesday Afternoon" especially),) and they are right about the hideous spoken intro and the orchestral "slush". I normally fast forward through these bit to get to the songs. Having said that, most of the music press are predictably anti-prog and I just ignore it now.
|
To each his own, but i beg to differ, DOFP is one of the most important and innovative albums ever made, and rolling stone just pisses on it, i guess they dont like to listen to bands that challenges their "its gotta be rock n roll" motto, for the moody blues best album to get a luckwarm review while gwen stefani, britney spears, black eyed peas and NSYNC have gotten 3 and 4 star reviews is a insult...An even worse offense is that they left out DOFP from the 500 greatest albums list, but they just had to add every eminem album, a crapload of madonna albums and no doubts rock steady...oh and yes and king crimson were not good enough for the top 500, but they just had to add hole and the cars...Maybe im being silly for letting one crummy magazines opinion get to me so much, but the fact that kids are being spoonfed on this kind of sh*t and are led to believe that the kind of bands that rolling stone are promoting is the best music out there is quite disturbing.
|
sadly, you're damn right. But, there's worse...at least at Rolling Stone they (seem to) know who The Moody Blues or KC or whoever you want are, while at MTV...ask any VJ who Robert Fripp is and you'll get an idea about their music culture....
------------- "my kingdom for a horse!" (W. Shakespeare, "Richard III")
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: September 11 2005 at 16:40
Rolling Stone was started as an attemt by the music industry in an attempt to cash in on the counterculture of the 60s. It was never intended as a serious piece of journalism. Trust me, my brother used to work for them way back when. It's a load of unapologetic commercial bullsh*t based on the hypocrisy of market executives who possess little to no integrity..
|
Posted By: Arsillus
Date Posted: September 11 2005 at 21:28
The Rolling Stone is a total piece of garbage- a sorry excuse for "journalism."
|
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: September 12 2005 at 08:36
boo boo wrote:
chopper wrote:
I actually agree with some of this review ("There are some quite fine rock tracks on Days of Future Passed ("Tuesday Afternoon" especially),) and they are right about the hideous spoken intro and the orchestral "slush". I normally fast forward through these bit to get to the songs. Having said that, most of the music press are predictably anti-prog and I just ignore it now.
|
To each his own, but i beg to differ, DOFP is one of the most important and innovative albums ever made, and rolling stone just pisses on it, i guess they dont like to listen to bands that challenges their "its gotta be rock n roll" motto, for the moody blues best album to get a luckwarm review while gwen stefani, britney spears, black eyed peas and NSYNC have gotten 3 and 4 star reviews is a insult...An even worse offense is that they left out DOFP from the 500 greatest albums list, but they just had to add every eminem album, a crapload of madonna albums and no doubts rock steady...oh and yes and king crimson were not good enough for the top 500, but they just had to add hole and the cars...Maybe im being silly for letting one crummy magazines opinion get to me so much, but the fact that kids are being spoonfed on this kind of sh*t and are led to believe that the kind of bands that rolling stone are promoting is the best music out there is quite disturbing.
|
You're right, DOFP deserves a place in any list of the top 500 albums because of it's importance to the development of music (and prog in particular). I just find the orchestral bits a bit cheesy and the spoken intro I guess was "of its time".
|
|